Nearly a quarter of renter households nationwide fell into the extremely low-income category in 2013, i.e., had incomes at or below 30% of the median for the area they lived in, according to a new National Low Income Housing Coalition report.
Three quarters of these 10.3 million or so households paid at least half their income for rent and basic utilities. This is one measure of the shortage of affordable rental housing in our country — only 31 units affordable and available to rent for every 100 ELI households.
The gap was much greater for the subset of households NLIHC classifies as deeply low-income, i.e. those with incomes no greater than 15% of their area’s median. Only 17 affordable, available units for every 100 of them, making for a shortage of 3.4 million units.
All but 5% of the DLI households paid more than half their income for rent, plus utilities. These, recall, are households that somehow scraped up the money. We don’t have a reliable figure for those who were homeless because they couldn’t.
Surprisingly, at least to me, the figures for the District are somewhat better. But they still confirm the need for more affordable housing, especially for the very lowest-income residents.
And perhaps the figures are overly rosy because, as I’ve written before, the area the District belongs to for affordability calculations includes some very well-off nearby communities.
With that caveat, here’s what NLIHC reports. In 2013:
- The District had 40 affordable, available units for every 100 ELI households, making for a total shortage 32,752.
- For every 100 DLI households, only 34 units were affordable and available — a shortage of 21,038.
- All but 35% of ELI households and 26% of DLI households paid at least half their income for rent, plus utilities.
These figures, recall, are more than a year old. We’ve had condo conversions, out-in-out apartment house demolitions and subsidized housing losses since. Rents have risen, sometimes quite a lot, even for tenants supposedly protected by the District’s rent control laws.
The figures are nevertheless timely because the Mayor and her people are deep into developing the proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal year. As the DC Fiscal Policy Institute reports, they’ve got to close a $200 million gap between projected revenues and the funds needed to sustain existing programs and services.
Any significantly larger investment to create and preserve affordable housing would widen the gap the Mayor would have to close because the District’s budget must, by law, balance every year.
A wider gap likewise if she — or alternatively, the DC Council — opts for greater investments in housing vouchers — either those that subsidize affordable housing operations or those that enable ELI/DLI households to rent at market rates or both, as the Fair Budget Coalition has recommended.
And again a wider gap if our policymakers boost funding for short-shot assistance that would enable some of those households to catch up on overdue rent or move to a cheaper place, if they can find it.
DCFPI recommends that the Mayor use some of the funds left over from last fiscal year, but they can’t be used for investments that involve multi-year commitments. So it also recommends that she “find ways to raise revenues.” This, I take it, is a tactful way to broach the subject of tax increases.
It’s hard to see how the District will significantly reduce homelessness without them. Because, however complex and diverse the root causes, homelessness for each individual and family reflects their inability to pay for rent, plus the bills for lighting, heating and the like.
Every one of the ELI and DLI households that’s paying over half its income for rent, plus utilities is at high risk of homelessness. Investments in affordable housing for them will pay off in lower costs in other areas — including, but not limited to shelter.
That’s not the only reason the Mayor and Council should make affordable housing a priority — preservation, first and foremost, but creation to replace lost units too.
We have the diversity of our community to consider. We’ve got the well-being and future prospects of children who suffer not only from homelessness, but from unstable housing — and from the stresses their parents experience as they try to earn enough and juggle the bills to keep them somehow housed.
If tax increases are needed, I’ll willingly pay my share. I’d like to think that others whose incomes are well above the ELI/DLI maximums will do so too.
NOTE: As I put the finishing touches on this post, DCFPI issued its own meaty report on “DC’s vanishing affordable housing.” The report includes a number of recommendations for policies to reverse the trends it documents. Highly recommended.